Veitch Penny LLP - Exeter | Crediton, Devon

Case

Spencer v Primetime Recruitment Limited
Employment Appeal Tribunal - (02 March 2006)

Issues

(1) Sex Discrimination
(2) Discriminatory acts
(3) Harassment

Facts

Miss Spencer was employed by Primetime in June 2004. During her employment some of Spencer's male colleagues made inappropriate remarks about the outfits and appearances of women. The remarks were made indiscriminately in front of both male and female employees. In August Miss Spencer's manager sent an email to all employees within the office (both male and female). The email contained a picture showing the genitalia of two naked women. Miss Spencer was distressed by the contents of the email and the clear comments made by her colleagues. She terminated her employment in August 2004 and wrote to her employer setting out her complaints regarding her colleagues' behaviour.

She then brought a tribunal claim based on unlawful sex discrimination arguing that the treatment she had received was as a result of her sex.

Miss Spencer was unsuccessful in her tribunal claim. The tribunal concluded that she had not been discriminated against on grounds of her sex because the comments and email were indiscriminate in nature as they were made to both male and female employees. The tribunal then concluded that Spencer had been treated the same as her male colleagues even though it acknowledged that the effect upon her had been different.

Spencer appealed the decision to the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT).

Decision

The EAT allowed Miss Spencer's appeal. It acknowledged that the comments and email had been directed indiscriminately to all employees, but found that it did not follow that the conduct could not be discriminatory. The EAT remitted the matter back to the tribunal for further consideration having noted that the original tribunal had failed to address the specific nature of the Acts.

Comments

This case serves as a useful reminder to employers of the types of behaviour which should not be permitted. In addition, since this case started, there has been an amendment to the Sex Discrimination Act which took effect in October 2006. This amendment means that there is now a specific definition of harassment. This provides further protection to female employees, where a woman is subjected to harassment on the grounds of her sex and where she suffers unwanted conduct that has the purpose or effect of violating dignity or creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for her.

Rachel Billen - Associate Solicitor, Commercial Department at Veitch Penny.
Tel: 01392 278381, Fax: 01392 410247, Email: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it